[lir-wg] Problems with route object update

Hi Christian,

Christian Rasmussen <chr at jay.net> writes:
>Hi Marcus,
>
>
>We have had the same situation a few times. The problem seems to be that
>"Provider Independent" IP addresses are not at all provider independent
>since the LIR is usually the maintainer of the inetnum object, so the
>customer will not be able to take the PI net to another LIR unless the
>previous LIR agrees to release the object.
>
>A solution could be to make the customer maintainer of the inetnum, that way
>the customer could simply add the new LIR's maintainer to MNT-ROUTES.

We recommend that End Users maintain their PI inetnum themselves if they 
want to do so. However, they are free to have their provider maintain it 
for them if they want that, instead.

If a maintainer is unable to update the object for the End User then 
please contact the RIPE NCC and we will try to help.

Also, it is worth noting that where two maintainers need to agree to the 
creation of a route object then both authentications can be passed to 
the database in the same e-mail. We have a graphical representation of 
the authentication rules at this page:

    <http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/faq/database/route-creation-checks.html>

Kind regards,

-- 
leo vegoda
RIPE NCC
Registration Services